Joan Wallach Scott is a pioneering historian and scholar whose activism
and interests reach throughout the academy and into issues at the heart
of contemporary society. Although trained as a social historian, Scott
is best known for her ground-breaking work in feminist history and gender
theory, fields to which she brings a critical engagement with post-structural
theory. Geographically, her work focuses on France, but to describe
Joan Scott as simply a French historian of gender would be inaccurate
and insufficient; her writings address universal issues such as how
power works, the relation between discourse and experience, and the
role and practice of historians. Indeed, her work is so stimulating
precisely because she insists on grappling with theory’s application
to historical and current events and focusing on how terms are defined
and how positions and identities are articulated.
Scott is well-known to historians of France and of gender,
but she has also made a name for herself among the wider academic community
through her work with the American Association of University Professors as chair of its Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure. A search of
her articles brings up not only works on women, gender, and work, but
also on academic freedom and political correctness. Her public writings
supporting academic freedom of speech showcase her commitment to individual
rights and equality, and reflect many of the theoretical issues that
she addresses in her research.
After receiving her doctorate from the University of Wisconsin-Madison,
Scott embarked on a long career teaching at such institutions as the
University of Illinois at Chicago; Northwestern; the University of North
Carolina, Chapel Hill; Rutgers; Johns Hopkins; and Brown University,
where she was the founding director of the Pembroke Center for the Teaching
and Research on Women. She has written numerous articles and monographs,
and edited several books. A comprehensive list of her work and scholarly
activities is found on her website: http://www.sss.ias.edu/community/scott.php
. Scott has received many prestigious awards for her work, including
a National Endowment for the Humanities fellowship, the Herbert Baxter
Adams Prize for the best first book by an American author on European
history, the Joan Kelly Memorial Prize in Women’s History, and the Nancy
Lyman Roelker Mentorship Award for Graduate Teaching, all from the American
Historical Association. She has been a valued mentor to many younger
scholars at her home universities as well as at other insitutions. Since
1985, Joan Wallach Scott has been the Harold F. Linder Professor at
the School of Social Science in the Institute for Advanced Study in
Princeton, New Jersey.
Joan W. Scott’s first book, The Glassworkers of Carmaux: French Craftsmen
and Political Action in a Nineteenth-century City (Harvard University Press, 1974)
examines the development of a workers’ movement among glassworkers during
the 1890s as a the result of changes in technology. She demonstrates
how the workers’ militancy, which aimed to preserve their lost role
as skilled artisans in a mechanizing labor environment, was due to the
changes that the workers were experiencing firsthand rather than to
the spread of socialist ideology. This often-cited book has been called
a “methodological gem”[1]
for Scott’s skill in combining quantitative and qualitative sources,
with a special focus on material that offered insight into the lived human
experience, into a coherent historical narrative.
Gender and the Politics of History (Columbia University Press, 1988, rev.
ed. 1999) assembles a set of essays written when Scott was the director
of the Pembroke Center for Teaching and Research on Women at Brown University.
While several of the essays recall the labor history of The Glassworkers
of Carmaux, the entire work clearly reveals Scott’s decisive shift
to the subjects and theoretical questions that have concerned her since
the mid-1980s: the history of gender and feminism and the critical possibilities
offered by post-structuralist and psychoanalytic theory. The essays are
divided into four categories: feminist history; gender and class; gender
and history; and equality and difference. Together they aim to understand
how knowledge of “social organization of sexual difference” has taken
place in the past, and how this knowledge has constructed our current
understanding of gender.
The most influential essay in the book, “Gender: A Useful Category
of Analysis,” lays out the history of the term “gender” as different
from “sex” — particularly as it applies to socially-constructed rather
than biologically-determined distinctions. Interest in gender (and class
and race) as a category of analysis developed in the 1970s among feminist
social historians as a way of broadening the historical field using
different theoretical perspectives and for different objectives. To
Scott however, gender is most powerful as “a primary way of signifying
relationships of power” when it exposes how political discourse has
used gendered terms and references to create meaning, by defining occupations
and familial, political, and social roles as masculine or feminine to
create natural hierarchies or oppositional relationships:
If the themes of gender and history unite this book, so does a preoccupation
with theory. Although historians are not trained (in the United States
at least) to be reflective or rigorous about their theory, I found it
imperative to pursue theoretical questions in order to do feminist history. […]
My motive was and is one that I share with other feminists and it is
avowedly political: to point out and change inequalities between women
and men. It is a motive, moreover, that feminists share with those concerned
to change the representation of other groups left out of history because
of race, ethnicity, and class as well as gender. Though simple to state,
those operations are difficult to implement, especially if one lacks
an analysis of how gender hierarchies are constructed, legitimated,
challenged, and maintained. (Gender and the Politics of History,
revised ed, 1999, p. 3)
Scott’s next monograph, Only Paradoxes to Offer, French Feminists
and the Rights of Man (Harvard University Press, 1996), is a collection of biographical
and critical essays on French feminists. Here, she continues her quest
to understand the intersection of gender and political power by analyzing
how successive French feminists worked to achieve political rights for
women from the French Revolution to the eventual granting of women’s
suffrage in 1944. Eschewing traditional biographical concerns, Scott
focuses on the strategies used by the French feminists Olympe de Gouges,
Jeanne Deroin, Hubertine Auclert, and Madeleine Pelletier to interpret
republican discourse to include women as rights-bearing individuals
- as citizens, workers, and voters. At its heart, this argument uncovers
the paradox of French republicanism: the republic is composed of equal
individuals, but by suppressing the differences among them, some individuals
are more equal than others.
Parité! (University of Chicago Press, 2005), Scott’s most recent
book, brings her commitment to the sticky relationship between power
and gender to the political movement in France during the 1990s for
gender parity in French electoral politics. According to Scott, this
quest for equal numbers of men and women candidates at all levels of
politics “demonstrated the difficulty of conducting a political struggle
with a complex concept (anatomical duality rather than sexual difference,
the power of the law to transform social and symbiotic relations between
the sexes or even to render gender irrelevant” (Parité!, p.
67). The central argument in this fight revolved around the question
of whether the abstract individualism of the French republic could recognize
differences within the nation, especially since the practical result
of this aspect of universalism had resulted in a (male, white, heterosexual)
political class that did not represent the full spectrum of contemporary
French society. To support their arguments, both the proponents and
the critics of parity evoked the principle of French universalism, arguing
that anti-discrimination or affirmative action measures were not compatible
with the republic’s relationship with its members. Scott draws comparisons
with similar issues challenging French universalism. The broader impact
of the question of parity was particularly evident when taken in the
larger context of political struggles taking place at the same time
— the fights to recognize the religious and cultural differences of
immigrants (the headscarf affair[2]) and homosexuals (PaCS[3]) — differences that,
like sexual difference between men and women, could not be abstracted
out of the universalism of republican thought. In Scott’s words, “Was
there some way of changing the notions of the individual, expanding
its capacity for abstraction to include differences once thought irreducible?
This was the challenge addressed by feminists who founded the parité
movement.”(Parité!, p. 31).
Joan Wallach Scott’s recent work, and the subject of her Presidential
Lecture, continues on this path of exploring the paradoxes provoked
by difference in the context of the universalism and abstract individualism
on which the French republic is founded. Her current research and subject
of her forthcoming book, The Politics of the Veil: Banning Islamic
Headscarves in French Public Schools, addresses the ongoing
discussion in France, and increasingly in many Western countries, on
the Islamic headscarf and the implications it symbolizes for religion
and women in the public spaces of republican, secular France. In her
lecture, “Cover-Up: French Gender Equality and the Islamic Headscarf,”
Scott will critically examine why supporters of the ban on Muslim headscarves
in French public schools argue that that their primary concern is for
the emancipation for women. Given that this topical subject brings together
the theoretical and historical issues that Scott has long been exploring,
it is sure to be an exciting and thought-provoking presentation!
Notes:
[1] Parker, Harold T. “A Methodological Gem.” Review in Journal
of Urban History, 2:3 (May 1976), p.373.
[2] For background on the headscarf affair, see the section entitled “Promoting Secularism in a Religiously Diverse Society” in the article “The Challenge of French Diversity,” by Kimberly Hamilton and Patrick Simon, hosted at the Migration Policy Institute.
[3] Pacte civil de solidarité — as Scott describes it in Parité!, a “civil pact of solidarity, a type of registered domestic partnership.” See also this description from the Embassy of France in the United States.